Quantitative food habits of the bullnose ray, Myliobatis freminvillii, in Delaware Bay

Szczepanski, John A.; Bengtson, David A.

doi:10.1007/s10641-014-0282-3

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Final models from the multivariate analyses contained the variables season and sex. The seasonal shift in diet was not surprising as the diets of batoids frequently vary seasonally due to changes in the available prey community (Platell et al ., ; Szczepanski & Bengtson, ; White et al ., ). In this instance, the seasonal shift appears to be driven by increased consumption of A. hepsetus in the summer, which parallels a significant increase in seasonal availability of A. hepsetus in Mobile Bay during that time (Sean Powers, unpubl.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discerning the dietary habits of the smooth butterfly ray Gymnura lessae using two distinct methods, otolith identification and metagenetics

Jargowsky

Cooper

Ajemian

et al. 2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two different methods, metagenetics and free-otolith identification, were used to identify prey in the stomach contents of 531 Gymnura lessae captured by trawling in Mobile Bay, Alabama 2016-2018. Both methods were found to produce analogous results and were therefore combined into a single complete dataset. All prey were teleosts; the families Sciaenidae and Engraulidae were the most important prey (prey specie index of relative importance 89.3% I PSRI ). Multivariate analyses indicated that the diet of G. lessae varied with sex and seasonality. Specifically, variability was probably due to morphologically larger females consuming larger teleost prey species compared with males, whereas seasonal variability was probably due to changes in the available prey community composition. The findings indicate that both metagenetics and free otolith identification, used independently or complementarily, offer robust means of characterising dietary habits for teleost-specialised species such as G. lessae, which may play an important role in the structure and maintenance of coastal food webs such as those in Mobile Bay. How to cite this article: Jargowsky MB, Cooper PT, Ajemian MJ, Colvin ME, Drymon JM. Discerning the dietary habits of the smooth butterfly ray Gymnura lessae using two distinct methods, otolith identification and metagenetics. J Fish Biol. 2020;96:434-443. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discerning the dietary habits of the smooth butterfly ray Gymnura lessae using two distinct methods, otolith identification and metagenetics

Jargowsky

Cooper

Ajemian

et al. 2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analyses based on extant predators indicate that large numbers of individuals, from tens to even hundreds, need to be sampled to capture a true picture of diet (e.g. Szczepanski & Bengtson, 2014). Ichnofossils are more common, although the poor quality and uncertainty regarding the makers of many specimens limits robust ecological interpretations (Lockley & Wright, 2003;Lockley, Harris & Mitchell, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Issues include alternative explanations of content fossils as post mortem artefacts, with items introduced via water flows (Tweet et al, 2008), and incorrectly inferring extents of dietary specialism through preservation of items consumed almost immediately prior to death (Platt et al, 2013b;Davis & Pineda-Munoz, 2016), and/or through small sample sizes (e.g. Szczepanski & Bengtson, 2014; see Section V.1). While careful consideration of specimen depositional environments should help account for post mortem artefacts, content fossil evidence can only ever indicate that a species sometimes consumed a particular food item and is therefore best interpreted in conjunction with other lines of evidence (Frey & Tischlinger, 2012).…”

Section: (D) Content Fossilsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pterosaur dietary hypotheses: a review of ideas and approaches

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pterosaurs are an extinct group of Mesozoic flying reptiles, whose fossil record extends from approximately 210 to 66 million years ago. They were integral components of continental and marginal marine ecosystems, yet their diets remain poorly constrained. Numerous dietary hypotheses have been proposed for different pterosaur groups, including insectivory, piscivory, carnivory, durophagy, herbivory/frugivory, filter-feeding and generalism. These hypotheses, and subsequent interpretations of pterosaur diet, are supported by qualitative (content fossils, associations, ichnology, comparative anatomy) and/or quantitative (functional morphology, stable isotope analysis) evidence. Pterosaur dietary interpretations are scattered throughout the literature with little attention paid to the supporting evidence. Reaching a robustly supported consensus on pterosaur diets is important for understanding their dietary evolution, and their roles in Mesozoic ecosystems. A comprehensive examination of the pterosaur literature identified 314 dietary interpretations (dietary statement plus supporting evidence) from 126 published studies. Multiple alternative diets have been hypothesised for most principal taxonomic pterosaur groups. Some groups exhibit a high degree of consensus, supported by multiple lines of evidence, while others exhibit less consensus. Qualitative evidence supports 87.3% of dietary interpretations, with comparative anatomy most common (62.1% of total). More speciose groups of pterosaur tend to have a greater range of hypothesised diets. Consideration of dietary interpretations within alternative phylogenetic contexts reveals high levels of consensus between equivalent monofenestratan groups, and lower levels of consensus between equivalent non-monofenestratan groups. Evaluating the possible non-biological controls on apparent patterns of dietary diversity reveals that numbers of dietary interpretations through time exhibit no correlation with patterns of publication (number of peer-reviewed publications through time). 73.8% of dietary interpretations were published in the 21st century. Overall, consensus interpretations of pterosaur diets are better accounted for by non-biological signals, such as the impact of the respective quality of the fossil record of different pterosaur groups on research levels. That many interpretations are based on qualitative, often untestable lines of evidence adds significant noise to the data. More experiment-led pterosaur dietary research, with greater consideration of pterosaurs as organisms with independent evolutionary histories, will lead to more robust conclusions drawn from repeatable results. This will allow greater understanding of pterosaur dietary diversity, disparity and evolution and facilitate reconstructions of Mesozoic ecosystems.

show abstract

“…1). Some species, such as eagle rays (Aetobatus narinari), prey almost exclusively on gastropods (Schluessel et al, 2010), while others, such as bat rays (Myliobatis), appear to prey preferentially on decapods (Gray et al, 1997;Szczepanski and Bengston, 2014) (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphology does not predict performance: jaw curvature and prey crushing in durophagous stingrays

Kolmann

Crofts

Dean

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All stingrays in the family Myliobatidae are durophagous, consuming bivalves and gastropods, as well as decapod crustaceans. Durophagous rays have rigid jaws, flat teeth that interlock to form pavement-like tooth plates, and large muscles that generate bite forces capable of fracturing stiff biological composites (e.g. mollusk shell). The relative proportion of different prey types in the diet of durophagous rays varies between genera, with some stingray species specializing on particular mollusk taxa, while others are generalists. The tooth plate module provides a curved occlusal surface on which prey is crushed, and this curvature differs significantly among myliobatids. We measured the effect of jaw curvature on prey-crushing success in durophagous stingrays. We milled aluminum replica jaws rendered from computed tomography scans, and crushed live mollusks, three-dimensionally printed gastropod shells, and ceramic tubes with these fabricated jaws. Our analysis of prey items indicate that gastropods were consistently more difficult to crush than bivalves (i.e. were stiffer), but that mussels require the greatest work-to-fracture. We found that replica shells can provide an important proxy for investigations of failure mechanics. We also found little difference in crushing performance between jaw shapes, suggesting that disparate jaws are equally suited for processing different types of shelled prey. Thus, durophagous stingrays exhibit a many-to-one mapping of jaw morphology to mollusk crushing performance.

show abstract

Quantitative food habits of the bullnose ray, Myliobatis freminvillii, in Delaware Bay

Cited by 18 publications

References 29 publications

Discerning the dietary habits of the smooth butterfly ray Gymnura lessae using two distinct methods, otolith identification and metagenetics

Discerning the dietary habits of the smooth butterfly ray Gymnura lessae using two distinct methods, otolith identification and metagenetics

Pterosaur dietary hypotheses: a review of ideas and approaches

Morphology does not predict performance: jaw curvature and prey crushing in durophagous stingrays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About